Baptist Pastor

[MbiaJc]

Except that the Greek is in the present tense, not past tense.

Doesn't matter

 

[JustinWindsor]

Respectfully, it appears to this observer that MbiaJc and lambslove have a very 'legalistic' view of this subject. I assume, then, that your pastors are perfect. Have never sinned before becoming a pastor and have never sinned since. You apparently would not tolerate it.

Your pastors must be hospitable in the sense that they've never offended anyone, always accepted invitations and are never in a bad mood.

Your pastors must not be addicted to wine - and of course this doesn't mean what it says, it means they must never allow wine to touch their lips, or at least since Mr. Welsh invented grape juice.

Your pastors' children must never have been observed running or shouting in or near the church building.

Your pastors' children must all be born again, and never touch alcohol, or commit any other sin.

Your pastors' GOOD reputation in the community means his reputation is without blemish. It is spotless. There is no one who holds anything against him because he has been perfect in everyone's eyes.

I, personally, don't know any pastors who have lived up to this absolute so I am thankful for 1 John 1:9,10 which declares;

If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

My opinion sides closer with Andyman_1970. With polygamy still an issue in that society, and knowing what the Christ and Apostles taught about God's grace and how we are not to judge, I believe it is a teaching against appointing a polygamist to the office of Pastor.

 

[Andyman_1970]

Doesn't matter

Really? So the words and grammar that Paul used under inspiration of the Holy Spirit does not matter? Really? That's a very dangerous and slippery slope to tread on.

I believe placing Jesus, Paul and the Scriptures in their historical, cultural and lingisitc (that would include the grammar and tense of the words used) context is very important. When the historical context is dismissed a gap of understanding is created with the Scriptures in which Jesus, Paul, the Bible can be remade to fit into whatever mold fallible man chooses to place them in.

This happened in the 20's and 30's when German theologians in a knee jerk reaction to Albert Switzer's work on the historical Jesus denied the context of the Bible and left a window open for the Nazi party to come in and literally remake Jesus into someone who hated Jews. This is why I find your position of dismissing the grammar of what Paul said so dangerous.

 

[Andyman_1970]

My opinion sides closer with Andyman_1970. With polygamy still an issue in that society, and knowing what the Christ and Apostles taught about God's grace and how we are not to judge, I believe it is a teaching against appointing a polygamist to the office of Pastor.

Not to mention Paul is referring to the church in Ephesus with his letter to Timothy in which the leaders/bishops/elders/pastors/etc. would have previously lead a life of the things listed by Paul.......which is why he writes that list in the present tense.

If Paul meant for Timothy to choose people in Ephesus who had never done those things in their life, then you would be hard pressed to find anyone to fill those positions in 1st century Ephesus with a church that had only been there at the most maybe 10 years. Again, context is key here, and it does not support the dogmatic belief that Paul is writing a laundry list of "this person should never have done XYZ".

 

[MbiaJc]

Really? So the words and grammar that Paul used under inspiration of the Holy Spirit does not matter? Really? That's a very dangerous and slippery slope to tread on.

I believe placing Jesus, Paul and the Scriptures in their historical, cultural and lingisitc (that would include the grammar and tense of the words used) context is very important. When the historical context is dismissed a gap of understanding is created with the Scriptures in which Jesus, Paul, the Bible can be remade to fit into whatever mold fallible man chooses to place them in.

This happened in the 20's and 30's when German theologians in a knee jerk reaction to Albert Switzer's work on the historical Jesus denied the context of the Bible and left a window open for the Nazi party to come in and literally remake Jesus into someone who hated Jews. This is why I find your position of dismissing the grammar of what Paul said so dangerous.

If it had been in past tense, you would have said, Pauls not talking about present but past. When husband of one wife or one woman man means the same whether past, present or future.

It amazes me when men today are smarter in discerning the scriptures than they were in the begining. When they don't even know who are the God ordained Undershepard\Pastors of the Church. You talk about being dangerous, that what dangerous. And we are reaping what has been sawn with that kind of thinking in the Churches today.

God puts qualified men in the Church for these positions that He has ordained. To think He can't is puting God in a small box. It is up to us the Church to recognize and apoint these men.

 

[MbiaJc]

Respectfully, it appears to this observer that MbiaJc and lambslove have a very 'legalistic' view of this subject. I assume, then, that your pastors are perfect. Have never sinned before becoming a pastor and have never sinned since. You apparently would not tolerate it.

Your pastors must be hospitable in the sense that they've never offended anyone, always accepted invitations and are never in a bad mood.

Your pastors must not be addicted to wine - and of course this doesn't mean what it says, it means they must never allow wine to touch their lips, or at least since Mr. Welsh invented grape juice.

Your pastors' children must never have been observed running or shouting in or near the church building.

Your pastors' children must all be born again, and never touch alcohol, or commit any other sin.

Your pastors' GOOD reputation in the community means his reputation is without blemish. It is spotless. There is no one who holds anything against him because he has been perfect in everyone's eyes.

I, personally, don't know any pastors who have lived up to this absolute so I am thankful for 1 John 1:9,10 which declares;

If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

My opinion sides closer with Andyman_1970. With polygamy still an issue in that society, and knowing what the Christ and Apostles taught about God's grace and how we are not to judge, I believe it is a teaching against appointing a polygamist to the office of Pastor.

What our Pastor is or isn't does not change God's word.

BTW I don't know of a Church that has the Undershepard\Pastor that God has ordained for that position. And not seeing this still does not change God's word.

Also obaying the instructions set forth in the NT, is not being legalistic, it is known as being obedient.

 

[Andyman_1970]

If it had been in past tense, you would have said, Pauls not talking about present but past. When husband of one wife or one woman man means the same whether past, present or future.

So then are you advocating it’s “ok” to take Scripture out of context then?

It amazes me when men today are smarter in discerning the scriptures than they were in the begining.

That statement could actually be turned around on you my brother, I’m simply trying to place the Scriptures in the context they were written, using the grammar from the Greek gives us insight as to what Paul was trying to convey. To assert that “it doesn’t matter” gives the impression you are smarter in discerning Scripture than they were in the beginning.

When they don't even know who are the God ordained Undershepard\Pastors of the Church. You talk about being dangerous, that what dangerous.

The problem is we do know, when we view the Scriptures as a whole and in their context those requirements become framed properly instead of at the whim of people interpretation and personal beliefs.

And we are reaping what has been sawn with that kind of thinking in the Churches today.

IMO we are reaping what we are sowing because of an artificial class system that has been put in place between the professional pastorate and the laity.

God puts qualified men in the Church for these positions that He has ordained. To think He can't is puting God in a small box.

I couldn’t agree with you more.

 

[JPPT1974]

To think that you are above the laws of God is simply compromising the Lord's will and word in our lives.
That makes God feel very upset as those laws and commandments should stay the way He made them.

 

[MbiaJc]

So then are you advocating it’s “ok” to take Scripture out of context then?

How do you reach that conclusion.

That statement could actually be turned around on you my brother, I’m simply trying to place the Scriptures in the context they were written, using the grammar from the Greek gives us insight as to what Paul was trying to convey. To assert that “it doesn’t matter” gives the impression you are smarter in discerning Scripture than they were in the beginning.

You miss the point: That the way this scripture has been taught and believed from the beginning. Till these last days.

The problem is we do know, when we view the Scriptures as a whole and in their context those requirements become framed properly instead of at the whim of people interpretation and personal beliefs.

Not when you make it say something it doesn't say, hadn't said from the beginning, till these last days.

IMO we are reaping what we are sowing because of an artificial class system that has been put in place between the professional pastorate and the laity.

There is no professional pastorate in the scripture. We are all priest in the eyes of God. You don't even know who God has ordained to be pastors. I asked that question to see if you could answer it, aparently you can't.

 

[Andyman_1970]

How do you reach that conclusion.

You exclamation that the tense of the Greek does not matter lead me to that conclusion.

You miss the point: That the way this scripture has been taught and believed from the beginning. Till these last days.

There are a lot of things that have been taught about the Scripture throughout history that are Biblically wrong, like using the Bible to justify slavery in the 1800’s. So saying that is was “never taught this way” is a very flimsy Biblical answer – Martin Luther didn’t do things the way it was taught “back then” in his time, sometimes the boat needs to be rocked for people to grasp what the Text is saying.

Not when you make it say something it doesn't say, hadn't said from the beginning, till these last days.

Paul wrote that passage in the present tense in the Greek, so you’re assertion that this is somehow “new” or I’m making the passage say something else is without basis both linguistically and contextually. I would assert that you’re making the passage say something it doesn’t say because Paul doesn’t even mention the word divorce in that passage.

There is no professional pastorate in the scripture. We are all priest in the eyes of God. You don't even know who God has ordained to be pastors. I asked that question to see if you could answer it, aparently you can't.

Sorry I was being facetious and it’s obvious you didn’t get it – I agree with you there is no “profession” pastorate in the. Thank you but according to the passage in Timothy, God doesn’t ordain pastors, it’s something a man desires to do (verse 1), there is no indication this is some sort of divine calling any different than the calling all believers have to serve God.

If you can produce something contextually of substance to this discussion rather than putting fourth church dogma I might be interested in considering it, otherwise I’m not interested in your opinions that don’t take into consideration the Scriptures as a contextual whole.

 

[MbiaJc]

There are a lot of things that have been taught about the Scripture throughout history that are Biblically wrong, like using the Bible to justify slavery in the 1800’s. So saying that is was “never taught this way” is a very flimsy Biblical answer – Martin Luther didn’t do things the way it was taught “back then” in his time, sometimes the boat needs to be rocked for people to grasp what the Text is saying.

That kind of thinking is dangerous to the Church. I was referring to the first Church and the Apostles. When one changes what they taught, one is on dangerous ground.

Paul wrote that passage in the present tense in the Greek, so you’re assertion that this is somehow “new” or I’m making the passage say something else is without basis both linguistically and contextually. I would assert that you’re making the passage say something it doesn’t say because Paul doesn’t even mention the word divorce in that passage.

You just don't get it do you. You are assuming because Paul used present tense they could have had others in the past. That is your openion, which the Apostles disagree.

Sorry I was being facetious and it’s obvious you didn’t get it – I agree with you there is no “profession” pastorate in the. Thank you but according to the passage in Timothy, God doesn’t ordain pastors, it’s something a man desires to do (verse 1), there is no indication this is some sort of divine calling any different than the calling all believers have to serve God.

God has chosen the Elders, as pastor, it is brought out verry clear in his word. I would say by that that He has ordanine them. However the Church is to appoint them to that position.

If you can produce something contextually of substance to this discussion rather than putting fourth church dogma I might be interested in considering it, otherwise I’m not interested in your opinions that don’t take into consideration the Scriptures as a contextual whole.

Just the Word my friend, you see it in another context, which is not the context the Apostles wrote it in.

Why would I wont someone as my spiritual ruler that can't rule his own house?

But that what we have today these professional pastors that can't even rule their own house. And don't even know who God has chosen to be pastors.

However you are right in what we have today, they are self called, not God called.

 

[eldermike]

However you are right in what we have today, they are self called, not God called.

Which pastor is self called? What is his name?

 

[MbiaJc]

Which pastor is self called? What is his name?

All of the profesional pastors we have today. God sure hadn't called them, for they sure don't fit the bill for who His word says He has chosen for pastors.

 

[eldermike]

All of the profesional pastors we have today. God sure hadn't called them, for they sure don't fit the bill for who His word says He has chosen for pastors.

You know them all? I know many but no where near all of them. The ones I know are called pastors. The teaching elder at my home church is a vocational pastor. He works more hours than anyone I know.

I sense that there is a bad experience in your life with a vocational pastor.

 

[JustinWindsor]

All of the profesional pastors we have today. God sure hadn't called them, for they sure don't fit the bill for who His word says He has chosen for pastors.

On whether you interpret Scripture like a Pharisee, or like a man filled with grace.

 

[MbiaJc]

You know them all? I know many but no where near all of them. The ones I know are called pastors. The teaching elder at my home church is a vocational pastor. He works more hours than anyone I know.

I sense that there is a bad experience in your life with a vocational pastor.

Will my friend it comes with a whole lot of praying and studying, while listening to the Holy Spirit.

Acording to scripture you can in no way justify these professional so called pastors.

You used the singler, when referring to the pastor of your Church. No where in the Bible does it uses singular when referring to the Elders\Bishop, of the Church, they are always plural. With each having the same authority. We serve a verry wise God, He knows several heads is better than one.

First off Paul sent Timothy into every City to appoint Elders\bishops. Why into very City were Elders to be appointed? Because there wasn't but one Church. Paul also warned us about breaking off into cults\Denominations. If we are going to teach the truth, we should teach it all not just part of it.

The Methodist Church the Lord has me in right now, is nothing more than a verry expensive social club. That is completly ignoring sound doctrine. With a professional social club leader.

We are all priest, when one divide the brotherhood into ministers and laymen. One is doing a thing Jesus says He hates.

 

[MbiaJc]

On whether you interpret Scripture like a Pharisee, or like a man filled with grace.

So doesn't matter what the Word says if we are full of grace, we can do it our way.

 

[Hisbygrace]

I agree it depends on the church, but I know that our church is full of divorced and remarried couples. I don't believe that the church has anymore right to judge a person than I do.

 

[JPPT1974]

The church has no right to judge a person at all.
That is up to the Lord.
That's His job.

 

[eldermike]

So doesn't matter what the Word says if we are full of grace, we can do it our way.

I have been thinking about this. What the word says is right but not a single one of us can do what it says. God's standard on His Word is perfection. "Be perfect as my Father in Heaven is perfect" Mat 5 (verse reference slips my mind). Ed Cole preaches this: The only verse you beleive is the one you obey. I think that's right. If the standard is "do" what the word says then you better take at look at the rules closely. You have to do all of it and have never missed a beat.

So, in fact, your statement is correct but with this minor adjustment. We should not seek to do it our way although to some degree we will. That's why there is grace. It's not for our abuse of it, it's just because we are not perfect, as our Father in Heaven is perfect.